Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1887-08-13
RAILWAY PASSENGERS.
They Have Rights Which Trsia Employees
Are Bound to Respect.

Are Bound to Respect.
An interesting case has lately been
decided by the court of last resort in
Pennsylvania, where the plaintiff had
recovered in an action against the Lake
Shore & Michigan Southern Railway
Company damages to the very unusual
amount of $4,000 The suit was
brought on account of severe and per-
manent injuries which the plaintiff re-
teived in consequence of being put off
in the middle Of the night from the lini-
tied express train running eastward
from Cleveland, o. He had ticket
which entitled him to a iirst-class pas
sage from Cleveland to Erie, and about
midnight he took his seat in car of
the limited express, to which he was
directed by a brakeman standing by.
1t appears, however, that ordinary tick
cts are not good on this train, for
which special rate of fare is charged.
The plaintiff was ignorant of this fact
until the conductor refused to take his
ticket, telling him that it was mo
| good and that his orders were to stop
the train and eject Immediately per-
sons who endeavorcd to ride on such
tickets. The plaintiff offered to pay
his fare in money, and when this offer
was refused, begged that at least he
should be carried to the next station
The conductor, however, would not
accedc even to this reasonable request,
but stopped the train and put off the
| plaintiff where there were many tracks
| and switches, where locomotives were
constantly passing and where ''broken
trains were 'foatcd.n While trying
to reach the nearest station the plain
tiff was struck in the back by some oh.
| ject which the jury must have inferred
was either Il locomotive or a car, and
so received the injury on account OF
which the suit was brought.
| The railroad company in sthcir de-
fense contended for principle, which,
if once established, would be extremely
convenient for such corporations mC
quite the reverse for their passengers
| They maintained that travellers by raj
are bound to know the rules of the roaC
in regard to the tickets which they bu,
Just as a citizen is bound to know thu
laws of his State and city; and conSe
quently that the plaintiff, in taking ;
seat in the limited express, was II tres
passcr, and could lawfully be treatc,
as such by the company The cour
rejected this pretension, saying: -
passenger who has an open way to al
open ear going to the place to which h
bought and holds Il ticket, withou
knowledge that the ticket is not goo,
on such car, is not to be treated as
wrong-doer, cndeayoring TO ride with
out payment of fare, or to ride in ca
which he knows his ticket gives II
right to enter" The plaintiff. there
fore, was entitled TO pay his fare il
, money. and the company had no RICH
, to eject him. Anotherpoint as odam
ages, almost equally important, wa
also decided in this case. The iudg
who presided at the jury trial charge
that 'punitiyc' damages, that i, dam
, ages which would be more than Il com
( pcnsation for the injury, and in the ma
ture ola punishment-might be giyel
if the jury found that the plaintiff wa
put off from the train at Il dangcrou
; place. The court sustained this rulin:
, saying that the act Of the cOnducto
amounted either to wilful misconduc
or reckless indifference to the safety o
the plaintiff; and that inasmuch as tn
, plaintiff could have recovered punitiv
: or exemplary damages against him, h,
could also recover them against his EN-
ploycr, the railroad company Th,
court added with some humor: 1T i
| unnecessary now to consider whethc
the company may put of u trcspa>set
towhom it owes no duty, at II plac
where there is probability that he wi
be killed. .'-BoSt0R IrG1Scripi.